JAI TARA MOVIES, Jaipur V. ITO, Jaipur

ITA 397/JPR/2011

• Counselvise Citation: 39723114 RSA 2011
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-11-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 21-10-2011
• Assessment Year: 2002-2003
• Appeal Filed On: 02-05-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VINOD JOHRI
• Assessee Lawyers: SHARVAN KUMAR GUPTA
• Keywords: Gift; Loose papers; Accommodation entries; Documents seized
• Section: 148; 144

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JAIPUR BENCH B JAIPUR (BEFORE SHRI R.K.GUPTA AND SHRI N.L.KALRA) ITA NO. 397 & 398/ JP/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03 & 2004-05 PAN: AAACJ 6171 G M/S. JAI TARA MOVIES (P) LTD. VS THE ITO P-27, PRINCEP STREET WARD 2 (2) KOLKATA JAIPUR (APPELLANT ) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY: SHRI SHARVAN KUMAR GUPTA DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI VINOD JOHRI DATE OF HEARING: 21-10-2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 16-11-2011 ORDER PER N.L. KALRA, AM:- THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE APPEALS AGAINST TWO D IFFERENT ORDERS OF THE LD. CIT(A)-I, JAIPUR DATED 01-03-2011 FOR THE ASSESSM ENT YEAR 2002-03 AND 2004-05.. 2.0 FIRST OF ALL, WE WILL TAKE UP THE APPEAL FOR TH E ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03. 2.1 THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE AR E AS UNDER:- 1. FOR THAT THE LD CIT(A)-1, JAIPUR HAS ERRED IN LAW AS WELL AS ON FACTS OF THE CASE IN CONFIRMING THE ADDI TION OF RS. 1,16,382/- MADE BY THE AO BEING THE AMOUNT OF ALLEG ED COMMISSION ON THE GROUND WHICH ARE NOT CORRECT. 2. FOR THAT THE LD CIT(A)-1, JAIPUR HAS ERRED IN LAW AS WELL AS ON FACTS OF THE CASE IN CONFIRMING THE ADDI TION OF RS. 6,70,000/- MADE BY THE AO BEING THE AMOUNT OF CASH DEPOSIT INTO BANK ON THE GROUND WHICH ARE NOT CORRE CT 2.2 THE ASSESSEE FILED THE RETURN OF INCOME DECLARI NG TOTAL LOSS OF (-)RS.156/- ON 07-01-2003. THE ASSESSEE COMPANY IS CONNECTED WI TH B.C. PUROHIT GROUP IN 2 WHICH SEARCH PROCEEDINGS WERE CONDUCTED ON 12-04-20 05. DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH, IT WAS NOTICED THAT B.C. PUROHIT GROUP WAS PROVIDING ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES THROUGH VARIOUS COMPANIES/ FIRMS FLOATED BY THEM. ON THE BASIS OF THE FACTS FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH IN THE CASE OF B. C. PUROHIT GROUP, THE AO ISSUED NOTICE U/S 148 ON 28-03-2007 AFTER RECORDING THE RE ASONS FOR REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT. THE AO IN HIS ORDER HAS MENTIONED THAT THE ASSESSEE COMPANY IS CONTROLLED BY THE MEMBERS OF THE PUROHIT FAMILY. TH ROUGH THIS COMPANY BOGUS ENTRIES OF LOAN/ ADVANCE/ GIFTS/ SHARE APPLICATION MONEY ETC. WERE PROVIDED. FOR PROVIDING SUCH ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES, THE DIRECTOR OF THE COMPANY CHARGED CERTAIN COMMISSION FROM BENEFICIARIES. SHRI PAWAN P UROHIT GRAND SON OF SHRI B.C. PUROHIT VIDE HIS STATEMENT ON 12-04-05 STATED THAT CASH WAS RECEIVED FROM INTERESTED PARTIES AND DEPOSITED IN CERTAIN BANK AC COUNT AND THEN CHEQUES WERE ISSUED. THE STATEMENT OF SHRI KRIPA SHANKAR WAS ALS O RECORDED AND HE ALSO STATED THAT B.C. PUROHIT & COMPANY USED TO GET 2% TO2.5% COMMISSION OF THE GROSS AMOUNT FOR GIVING SHAPE TO SUCH SHAM TRANSACTION. T HE PERUSAL OF THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE COMPANY ALSO INDICATES THAT JUST BEFORE ISSU E OF CHEQUE, CASH WAS DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT. SOME OF THE BENEFICIARIES HAVE SURRENDERED SUCH LOAN/ ADVANCES FOR TAXATION. FROM THE BANK ACCOUNTS, THE AO NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS ISSUED CHEQUES/ DEMAND DRAFT TO THE BENEFICIARI ES TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 58,29,100. THERE WAS CASH DEPOSIT OF RS. 6,70,000/- IN THE BANK ACCOUNT. THE AO ISSUED A QUERY LETTER DATED 24-12-2007. IN THIS LET TER, THE ASSESSEE COMPANY WAS INTIMATED THAT THE COMPANY IS CONTROLLED BY SHRI KR IPA SHANKAR SHARMA AND OTHER DIRECTOR IS SHRI SUNIL VERMA. SHRI KRIPA SHANKAR I N HIS STATEMENT HAS ADMITTED OF CHARGING COMMISSION FOR PROVIDING ACCOMMODATION ENT RIES. THE BANK WAS SITUATED 3 IN JAIPUR. THE AO THEREFORE, PROPOSED TO CHARGE COM MISSION AT 2% ON THE CHEQUES ISSUED OF RS. 58,19,100/-. THE ASSESSEE FILED THE R EPLY DATED 27-12-2007. THE COMPANY HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY COMMISSION. NO DOCUMEN T WAS FOUND DURING THE SEARCH OPERATION. THE DEPOSITION OF SHRI PAWAN KUMA R PROHIT IS ALREADY RETRACTED. THE REPLY WAS NOT FOUND ACCEPTABLE BY THE AO. THE A O THEREFORE, ADDED A SUM OF RS. 1,16,382/- AS COMMISSION ON PROVIDING ACCOMMODA TION ENTRIES AND A SUM OF RS. 6,70,000/- DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT WAS AL SO HELD AS UNEXPLAINED. 2.3 BEFORE THE LD CIT(A), IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT NO MATERIAL WAS FOUND REGARDING COMMISSION INCOME FOR PROVIDING ACCOMMODA TION ENTRIES. ACCORDING TO THE LD.AR OF THE ASSESSEE, SHRI KRIPA SHANKAR SHARM A IS A THIRD MEMBER HAVING NO LINK WITH THE ASSESSEE COMPANY AND HIS STATEMENT WA S RECORDED DURING SEARCH OF OTHER COMPANIES. IT WAS FURTHER STATED THAT SHRI KR IPA SHANKAR SHARMA WAS NOT THE DIRECTOR OF THE COMPANY. NO ADDITION CAN BE MADE ON THE STRENGTH OF STATEMENTS OF THIRD PERSONS. RELIANCE WAS PLACED IN THE CASES OF SHALIMAR BULDCON (P) LTD. VS AO , 45 DTR 185. THE AO HAS NOT PROVIDED THE NAMES AND ADDRESS OF THOSE PERSONS WHO ALLEGEDLY SURRENDERED THE AMOUNTS RECEI VED FROM THE COMPANY AS LOAN/ ADVANCE OR SHARE APPLICATION MONEY. 2.4 THE LD CIT(A) REQUIRED THE AO TO OFFER HIS COMM ENTS THROUGH REMAND REPORT BECAUSE THE ASSESSMENT ORDER IS SILENT ON T HE ISSUE RAISED BEFORE THE LD CIT(A) BUT NO REPORT WAS RECEIVED FROM THE AO. THE LD CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ADDITION AFTER OBSERVING AS UNDER:- CONTENTION OF THE AR IS CONSIDERED. THE APPELLANT WAS REQUIRED TO EXPLAIN CASH DEPOSITED IN HIS BANK ACCOUNT ON VARIOUS DATES. QUESTION IS NOT WHETHER BANK ACCO UNT 4 SHOULD BE CONSIDERED AS DISCLOSED OR UNDISCLOSED BU T AS PER LAW THE APPELLANT WAS REQUIRED TO EXPLAIN THE SOURC E OF CASH DEPOSITED IN ITS BANK ACCOUNT. A BANK ACCOUNT IS AL SO BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. THE CASE LAWS RELIED UPON BY THE AR AR E IN DIFFERENT CONTEXT. THE DECISION OF HONBLE DELHI IT AT IN THE CASE OF M/S. MAYAWATI VS. DCIT 113 TTJ 178 IS N OT APPLICABLE IN PRESENT CASE AS IN THAT CASE THE BOOK S OF ACCOUNTS WERE NOT MAINTAINED AND IT WAS HELD THAT F OR MAKING ADDITION UI/S 68 BALANCE SHEET CANNOT BE EQU ATED TO BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND BANK PASS BOOK WAS NOT A BOOK OF ACCOUNT WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 68. IN THE CA SE OF LATE SOHAN LAL SAHOO 29 TW 9 (JP) IT WAS HELD THAT BANK PASS BOOK AND LOOSE PAPERS CANNOT BE TREATED AS ACC OUNT BOOK. IN THE PRESENT CASE THE APPELLANT HAS MAINTAI NED BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND THE DEPOSITS APPEARING IN THE BANK A/C WERE CLAIMED TO BE CONNECTED TO THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. A S THE BANK A/C IS NOT THE SOLE BOOK OF ACCOUNT MAINTAINED BUT IS A PART OF REGULAR OF ACCOUNTS, SUCH BANK A/C IS NOTHI NG BUT BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND THEREFORE, THE CONTENTION OF THE AR TO THAT EXTENT IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. NO EVIDENCE OF SHARE APPLICATION, SHARE ISSUED TO THE ALLEGED APPLICANT WERE FOUND AT THE TIME OF SEARCH. THERE IS NO NEXUS BETWEEN TH E CASH DEPOSITED AND SO CALLED SHARE APPLICATION MONEY REC EIVED. DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH ACTION CARRIED OUT ON 1 2.4.2005 IN THE APPELLANT GROUP CASES IT WAS FOUND THAT DIRE CTORS OF THE COMPANY ALONGWITH SHRI KRIPA SHANKER SHARMA, WERE INDULGING IN FLOATING VARIOUS COMPANIES AND ISSUING ACCOMMODATION BILLS IN THE FORM OF LOAN, SHARE APPL ICATION MONEY, GIFTS ETC. THE FACTS COLLECTED DURING THE CO URSE OF SEARCH AND STATEMENT OF SHRI KRIPA SHANKER CLEARLY ESTABLISHED THAT HUGE CASH WAS DEPOSITED IN THE APP ELLANTS BANK ACCOUNT ALONGWITH OTHER GROUP CONCERNS BANK A CCOUNT 5 AND CHEQUES/DRAFTS WERE ISSUED TO THE EXISTING PART IES. THE FACT THAT SOME OF THE BENEFICIARIES HAVE ADMITTED T HIS FACT AND SURRENDERED SUCH ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES PURCHASE D FURTHER ESTABLISHED THAT SAID TRANSACTIONS OF SHARE APPLICANT WERE NOT GENUINE. BY NOT PRODUCING ANY OF THE SO CA LLED SHARE APPLICANTS FOR EXAMINATION BEFORE THE AO, THE APPELLANT FAILED TO SUBSTANTIATE ITS CASE, BY FAILI NG TO PROVE THE IDENTITY AND THE DIRECT SOURCE OF DEPOSITS OF C ASH THE APPELLANT WAS LIABLE TO BE TAXED FOR CASH DEPOSITS IN ITS BANK ACCOUNT. IT IS SURPRISING THAT THE SO CALLED SHARE HOLDERS ARE INVESTING ONLY IN CASH AND THOUGH IT IS CLAIMED THA T THEY ARE ASSESSED TO TAX NO ONE BOTHERS OF ISSUING CHEUES. A S THE DEPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT REMAINED UNEXPLAINED, SUCH UNEXPLAINED CASH DEPOSITS WERE RIGHTLY ADDED TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE APPELLANT COMPANY. THE TECHNICAL OBJE CTIONS RAISED BY THE APPELLANT MAY NOT BE GIVEN CONSIDERAT ION IGNORING THE OUTCOME OF THE SEARCH WHICH IS THE ULT IMATE AND CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE. AS SUCH 3 RD GROUND OF APPEAL IS DECIDED AGAINST THE APPELLANT AND ADDITION OF RS.6, 70,000/- IS HEREBY CONFIRMED. COMING TO THE 2 ND GROUND OF APPEAL ON ADDITION OF RS.116382/- BEING COMMISSION RECEIVED BUT NOT DISCL OSED, FROM THE DECISION IN GROUND OF APPEAL NO.3 IT IS CL EAR THAT THE APPELLANT HAS FAILED TO PROVE THE ALLEGED SHARE APPLICATION MONEY BY NOT PRODUCING EVEN SO CALLED S HARE APPLICANTS IN SPITE OF PROVIDING SUFFICIENT OPPORTU NITIES TO THE APPELLANT,. THE APPELLANT THUS, FAILED TO DISCH ARGE ONUS. ALL THE DEPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNTS AND OTHER ACC OUNTS REMAINED UNEXPLAINED AND THEREFORE ADDITION ON ACCO UNT OF DEPOSITS MADE IN THE BANK ACCOUNT IS CONFIRMED. IT IS CLEAR THAT ONLY TO ISSUE ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES BY WAY OF CHEQUE OR DRAFT THE APPELLANT HAS USED CASH DEPOSITED IN B ANK 6 ACCOUNT. TO JUSTIFY THE BANK DEPOSITS, STORY OF SHA RE APPLICATION MONEY WAS INTRODUCED. AS ADMITTED DURIN G THE SEARCH STORY OF SHARE APPLICATION MONEY WAS INTRODU CED. AS ADMITTED DURING THE SEARCH CASE THE APPELLANT EARNE D COMMISSION INCOME ON ISSUING CHEQUES/DRAFTS OF RS.58,29,100/-. COMMISSION @ 2% ON THIS AMOUNT WHIC H COMES TO RS.1,16,382/- WAS RIGHTLY ADDED BY THE AO IN THE HANDS OF THE APPELLANT AND THEREFORE SAME IS HEREBY CONFIRMED. FROM THE STATEMENT OF SH.KRIPA SHANKER SHARMA AND MATERIAL COLLECTED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH IT W AS ESTABLISHED THAT THE APPELLANT COMPANY WAS ENGAGED IN ISSUING ACCOMMODATION ENTRY BILLS. SOME OF THE BENEFICIARIES HAVE SURRENDERED THE ENTRIES PURCHASE D. ESTIMATION OF RATE OF COMMISSION IS BASED ON STATEM ENT OF SH.KRIPA SHANKER SHARMA AND VARIOUS OTHER PERSONS R ELATED TO THIS GROUP. CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE THAT MANY OF SUCH PARTIES HAVE SURRENDERED ON THIS ACCOUNT ALSO PROVE D THAT THE APPELLANT HAS RECEIVED COMMISSION FOR ISSUING ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES. THE APPELLANT ALSO FAILED TO GIVE ANY EVIDENCE OF RECEIVING INTEREST FROM THESE PARTIES I N SUBSEQUENT YEARS AS THE APPELLANT HAS TAKEN PLEA TH AT MONEY WERE ADVANCED TO THESE PARTIES AS LOANS. THE FACT I S ALREADY ESTABLISHED IN THE GROUP THAT THE COMPANIES WERE FL OATED ONLY TO ISSUE ACCOMMODATION BILLS/ENTRY AND THE APP ELLANTS CASE CANNOT BE CONSIDERED IN ISOLATION. THE OUTCOME OF SEARCH IN THE GROUP CASES IS MATERIAL FACT AND TAKI NG INTO CONSIDERATION THESE FACTS, ESTIMATION OF COMMISSION INCOME MADE BY THE AO IS HEREBY APPROVED BEING REASONABLE AS WELL AS BASED ON THE ADMISSION OF THE CONCERNED PER SONS. 7 WITH THIS ADDITION OF RS.1,16,382/- IS CONFIRMED AN D 2 ND GROUND OF APPEAL IS DECIDED AGAINST THE APPELLANT. 2.5 DURING THE COURSE OF PROCEEDING BEFORE US, THE LD.AR HAS FILED THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS CONTAINING 19 PAGES AND HAS ALSO FILED THE PAPER BOOK CONTAINING 107 PAGES. IT IS TRUE THAT CERTAIN ISSUES IN RESPECT OF ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF CONNECTION WITH B.C. PUROHIT GROUP WERE CONSIDERED IN THE CAS E OF SHALIMAR BULDCON (P) LTD. (SUPRA). HOWEVER, IN THAT CASE, WE WERE HAVING THE BENEFIT OF GOING THROUGH THE STATEMENT RECORDED AT THE TIME OF SEARCH. M/S. SHAL IMAR BULDCON (P) LTD. WAS NOT THE COMPANY BEING CONTROLLED BY B.C. PUROHIT GROUP BUT WAS A COMPANY WHICH WAS THE BENEFICIARY OF THE ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES AS PER ALLEGATION OF THE REVENUE. THE INSTANT COMPANY IS CONTROLLED BY B.C. PUROHIT G ROUP. THE FORM NO. 35 WHICH IS REQUIRED TO BE SUBMITTED BEFORE THE LD CIT(A) FO R THE PURPOSE OF FILING OF THE APPEAL HAS BEEN SIGNED BY B.C. PUROHIT WHILE THE FORM NO. 36 REQUIRED TO BE FILED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL IN RESPECT OF THE APPEAL IS SIG NED BY SHRI SUSHIL KUMAR PUROHIT. IN THE PAPER BOOK, THE LD.AR HAS MENTIONE D THAT THE PRESENT DIRECTORS ARE SHRI BAL CHAND PUROHIT AND SHRI SHIV KUMAR. WE ARE NOT AWARE AS TO WHO WERE THE DIRECTORS DURING THE PREVIOUS YEAR RELEVANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. THE AO HAS NOT REPRODUCED ANY INFORM ATION FROM THE STATEMENT RECORDED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH IN B.C. PUROH IT GROUP. THE STATEMENT OF SHRI KRIPA SHANKAR SHARMA WAS ALSO RECORDED. WE ARE NOT AWARE AS TO WHETHER ANY OF THE PERSONS OF B.C. PUROHIT GROUP OR SHRI KRIPA SHANKAR SHARMA ADMITTED IN THEIR STATEMENTS THAT THE CONCERN M/S. JAI TARA MOVIES (P) LTD. WAS ALSO INDULGING IN PROVIDING ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES. THUS THE BASIC FACTUAL INFORMATION IS NOT CONTAINED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDE R FOR COMING TO ANY FACTUAL 8 FINDINGS. THE AO HAS ALSO NOT MENTIONED AS TO WHICH BENEFICIARIES ADMITTED OF RECEIVING THE ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES AND SURRENDERED SUCH AMOUNT REPRESENTING ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES BY FILING RETURN OR ADMITTING DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. WE ARE NOT AWARE AS TO WHET HER CERTAIN DOCUMENTS RELATING TO THIS COMPANY WERE FOUND DURING THE COUR SE OF SEARCH IN THE B.C. PUROHIT GROUP. LOOKING TO THE FACTS REFERRED TO ABOVE, IT IS NOT POSSIBLE FOR US TO RECORD THE CONCLUSIVE FINDING AS TO WHETHER THE ASSESSEE WAS I NDULGING IN PROVIDING ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES. HENCE, IT WILL BE FAIR AND R EASONABLE TO SET ASIDE THE ASSESSMENT TO BE MADE AGAIN AFTER CONSIDERING THE S TATEMENTS RECORDED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH IN THE CASE OF B.C. PUROHIT GROUP AND CONSIDERING THE INFORMATION AVAILABLE IN THE DOCUMENTS SEIZED AT TH E TIME OF SEARCH IN THE B.C. PUROHIT GROUP. 3.0 NOW WE TAKE UP THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL OF THE ASS ESSEE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05 WHICH ARE AS UNDER:- 1. FOR THAT THE LD CIT(A)-1, JAIPUR HAS ERRED IN LAW AS WELL AS ON FACTS OF THE CASE IN CONFIRMING THE ASSE SSMENT ORDER U/S 144 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 PASSED BY THE LD AO ON THE GROUNDS WHICH ARE NOT CORRECT. 2. FOR THAT THE LD CIT(A)-1, JAIPUR HAS ERRED IN LA W AS WELL AS ON FACTS OF THE CASE IN CONFIRMING THE ADDI TION OF RS. 2,16,338/- MADE BY THE AO TREATING THE SAME ALLEGED COMMISSION EARNED ON THE GROUND WHICH ARE NOT CORRE CT. 3. FOR THAT THE LD CIT(A)-1, JAIPUR HAS ERRED IN LA W AS WELL AS ON FACTS OF THE CASE IN CONFIRMING THE ADDI TION OF RS.79,95,000/- MADE BY THE AO TREATING THE SAME AS ALLEGED UNEXPLAINED CASH DEPOSIT INTO BANK ON THE GROUND W HICH ARE NOT CORRECT 3.1 DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE FIRST GROUND WAS NOT PRESSED BY THE LD.AR OF THE ASSESSEE. HENCE, THE SAME IS DISMISSED BEING NOT PRESSED. 9 4.1 THE SECOND AND THIRD GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE SIMI LAR TO THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03. FOLLOWING OU R FINDINGS FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03, WE FEEL THAT THE ISSUES RAISED BY TH E ASSESSEE ARE REQUIRED TO BE RECONSIDERED BY THE AO AFTER CONSIDERING THE STATEM ENTS AND OTHER RELEVANT INFORMATIONS NOTICED DURING THE COURSE OF B.C. PURO HIT GROUP SO THAT THE ASSESSMENT ORDER BECOMES A SPEAKING ORDER. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE A LLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 16-11 -2011. SD/- SD/- (R.K. GUPTA) (N.L. KALRA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JAIPUR DATED; 16 /11/2011 *MISHRA COPY FORWARDED TO :- 1. M/S. JAI TARA MOVIES, KOLKATA 2. THE ITO WARD 2 (2), JAIPUR 3. THE LD. CIT BY ORDER 4. THE LD. CIT(A) 5. THE LD.DR 6. THE GUARD FILE (ITA NO.397 & 398/JP /11) A.R, ITAT, JAIPUR 10